netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 4/6] net: trust the bitmap in __dev_alloc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2023 09:00:26 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
	pabeni@...hat.com, johannes.berg@...el.com, mpe@...erman.id.au,
	j@...fi
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/6] net: trust the bitmap in __dev_alloc_name()

Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 09:04:36PM CEST, kuba@...nel.org wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 12:38:31 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >+	if (i == max_netdevices)
>> >+		return -ENFILE;  
>> 
>> Hmm, aren't you changeing functionality here? I mean, prior to this
>> patch, the i of value "max_netdevices" was happily used, wan't it?
>> In theory it may break things allowing n-1 netdevices of a name instead
>> of n.
>
>Good point, I should add that to the commit message.
>But we don't care, right? Nobody is asking to increase
>the limit, feel like chances that someone will care 
>about 32k vs 32k - 1 devices are extremely low.

Yes, I think that would be fine. Rare conditions.